No. 18-8860

David Clum, Jr. v. Gene Beasley, Warden

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-04-16
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-rights due-process due-process,fifth-amendment,habeas-corpus,pro-se,a equal-protection habeas-corpus pro-se pro-se-litigation sixth-amendment supervisory-powers
Key Terms:
DueProcess FifthAmendment HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2019-05-23
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals violated the Fifth Amendment-Due Process Rights of the Petitioner

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals violated the Fifth Amendment-Due Process Rights of the Petitioner by applying different standards and methods to his Pro se Appeal which was filed in objection to the erroneous and prejudicial dismissal of his Habeas Corpus Petition, originally filed in the United States District Court? 2. Whether the unfair and unequal treatment of Pro se litigants (this litigant) has violated the Fifth Amendment-Equal Protection Rights of the Petitioner, in the Courts in toto? 3. Whether the unfair treatment and methods of the Courts below of the instant Pro_se Petitioner has deprived the Petitioner of his Fifth Amendment-Due Process guarantee and : rendered an actually innocent man in prison, therefore invoking the supervisory powers of this Court to correct a manifest miscarriage of justice? 4. Whether the ever-evolving methods being used by Courts below to dispose of Pro se challenges and attacks on erroneous convictions is in violation of the United States Constitution? 5. Whether the Petitioner has been systematically deprived of his Sixth Amendment-Due Process Right to Effective Assistance of Counsel.

Docket Entries

2019-05-28
Petition DENIED.
2019-05-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.
2019-04-30
Waiver of right of respondent Beasley, Warden, Gene to respond filed.
2019-04-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 16, 2019)

Attorneys

Beasley, Warden, Gene
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
David Clum
David Earle Clum Jr. — Petitioner